Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Strife26]

It's very hypocritical, in fact, but it is what it is.


I'd disagree with you on the rest of your post though, MetalSlimeHunt. ROTC scholarships are something that is well within the reach of just about anyone wanting to go to college, it takes a fair bit or work, sure, but so does any manner of paying that bill. At least from my perspective, having to spend those years as an occifer when you get out isn't a bad thing, guaranteed reasonable job that provides experience that looks good on every resume. Going enlisted is a bit more work, but it's less of a time commitment too. For me at least, it's more than possible to start taking college classes right now (and I'm totally going to get on that one of these weeks, I promise!),  and when I get out the post 9/11 GI bill gets into effect. It's no free-ride, but it's very close, especially if I'm doing the work saving up a bit right now. In either case, I'd very strongly contend that being in the military builds the kind of skill set that's useful all over the place, but an especially big advantage over someone going to college straight out of high school.

I'm not sure how often red states get upset with veteran benefits, loyalty to the vets is a very big deal to most conservatives, and other than state veteran funeral services, that's mostly federal money, and federal money that is well-publicized as being inadequate at that (not that they won't raise bloody hell over how poorly run vet services are, which I think everyone could agree on).

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm just saying, I went to a 2500 student high school, and this year there was one military scholarship in the whole 500 student senior class. From the Navy, oddly enough.

As for conservatives being loyal to veterans, I think that's more lip service than anything else. Conservatives will go head over heels to fund active military projects, necessity or practicality notwithstanding, but I doubt they care much about the actual people behind the military at all. They certainly don't seem to care much about anyone else who needs government assistance.

[kaijyuu]

Remember, the military is all about sending people to fight and die for what other people decide they should fight and die for. Those who support it for its practical uses (war, intimidation, etc) aren't interested in the people within, except as a statistic to prove the military's might. Scholarships and benefits are just bait to hook recruits; fulfilling those promises (especially veteran's benefits) is a side effect of the soldiers unfortunately not dying.

[Strife26]

Sure, but I think that that'd be a question of how many of those 25 hundred worked to try to get one. To some extent, it's a tough process, but mostly only because it's something that has fairly unforgiving and early deadlines. The kind of thing that's tough unless you're sure what you want from the beginning. I know that in my high school, at least, out of the ten or so who seriously put in paperwork, none of them didn't get in, much less the couple of idiots who enlisted.



I suppose that that's a matter of perspective on vet support, but as far as I'm read up on, seriously slashing anything dealing with their budget is a pretty tough no-can-do zone for Congress, much to Leroy Panetta's annoyance.


That's flat out wrong, I'm afraid, Kaijyuu. I mean, do I really need to explain point by point, or can you take my word on that?

[Strife26]

Perhaps that's a bit brusque of an answer. Your statement was enough of an overstatement to be seriously misleading. To reference a tired bit of Patton, war isn't about me dying. It's about me killing the other fucker with fire, maneuver, and the shock effect of heavy armor.

Simple bodies is all fine and good in for recruiters, but 11bravos aren't nearly as valuable as a good leader. That takes finding smart people. Now, there's a very big skill gap between edumacation and leading men into bullets (or more importantly, running that company, battalion, and brigade), but there's certainly a correlation. Signalling theory of education and all. The people who are looking for a way to get ahead and are willing to work hard for it are the kind that you want in your military.

So offering education incentives is a win-win for the army, it lets them get more people,  but more importantly, attracts good people.



From the opposite side, meanwhile, one of the core concepts of Army leadership is the two-fold goal of leading soldier.
1. the accomplishment of the mission
2.the welfare of the soldiers

That welfare part gets taken very seriously. I don't remember off the top of my head, but we're all required to go through a bunch and a half of classes in the process of ending our army time so that we'll transfer as smoothly as possible. Heck, even if the Army is kicking a guy out because he's a frigging shitbag who (snip), it still does it's best to make sure he's going to be alright.

Besides the moral level, it's certainly tracked. Former servicemen being homeless is tracked very heavily both by the media and the military, and that's certainly a public affairs deal that trickles all the way down to the company level.

[Sheb]

But then, why do we seem to heard so much about vets having trouble reintegrating civilian life? PTST? (It's a real question, I have no idea)

[Osmosis Jones]

Wasn't a lot of the current military attention on vets a result of the fallout from the Vietnam and first Gulf war? Thus, while these days the military does track the welfare of it's soldiers, there was a time still relatively fresh in peoples minds when they did not (or at least not to a sufficient degree)?

Strife's experiences I would assume are very much with the new military (I think I remember your posts about actually signing up?), while most of what has had time to percolate through societal awareness are the stories from the previous generation.

That would be my guess at least.

[Sheb]

That may be that. Maybe Strife's POV is a bit too rosy as well, since he is after all not a vet yet. Maybe most of his information come from internal army propaganda.

Because when you look at some other stuff, like the infamous mass rape and cover-up, it's hard to think the army is so interested in the well-being of its soldiers. At least of some of its soldiers.

[Mrhappyface]

Internal Army Propaganda...Sorry, but that's sounds a little silly, having grown up on military installations my entire life.
Just because it doesn't reach mainstream media attention doesn't mean the military isn't taking action.

[sneakey pete]

Yeah, it does sound a bit silly, and probably is. Army is a hell of a good deal, so long as you're happy with that kind of lifestyle.

[G-Flex]

Isn't that sort of tautological? You're basically saying "The Army's fine, as long as you're happy with being in the Army and all that entails".

[Nadaka]

Being a soldier is definitely not a productive way to pay for college for most people. I know of a few people in my generation who have been offered full rides in exchange for service after committing themselves to ROTC, but only a few. My grandfather benefited greatly from joining the military and surviving Vietnam, but that was then and this is now.

I'd say it would probably be bad to be a veteran in a red state. After all, veteran's benefits are state handouts, and we know how US conservatives feel about the government giving people money.

I'd rather be considered the dog of war that I am, but heck if someone saying bad things about my buddies isn't a very good way to provoke my ire.

That seems hypocritical.

It depends on your field of study. If you get your education in a field that is military industrial/science compatible, vets have major advantages being hired on for defense work. More than half the guys in my office are vets.

Internal Army Propaganda...Sorry, but that's sounds a little silly, having grown up on military installations my entire life.
Just because it doesn't reach mainstream media attention doesn't mean the military isn't taking action.

Having grown up around the military my whole life as well, there is a certain degree of obfuscation, not sure if it would qualify as propaganda most of the time though. At least outside SAC. The Strategic Air Command is pretty fucked up.

[Josephus]

Isn't that sort of tautological? You're basically saying "The Army's fine, as long as you're happy with being in the Army and all that entails".

That applies to plenty of things, of course.

[sneakey pete]

Isn't that sort of tautological? You're basically saying "The Army's fine, as long as you're happy with being in the Army and all that entails".

No, I don't think so. I'm not saying 'its fine'. I'm saying that compared to say, getting a loan and doing your own studies, it is a much better deal, as people have highlighted before. I was just reiterating it, I guess. Then I also point out that there are lifestyle factors that come into it (eg, some people will get sick of being told what to do pretty quick), or it just might plain not be the kind of work that you want to get into. Not much of an avenue for certain professions in the army, whereas for others you can get your qualifications easily.

[Sheb]

Well, propaganda may have been too strong a word, but it seems pretty evident to me that the army will try to present the vets programs in a good light to serving member. Need to keep up troops morale and all.

Not to say that the army can't be a sweet deal: over here in Belgium, enrolling in the Royal Military School means you get paid for your engineering studies, (education is pretty cheap for civilians) and get a really good education. The counterside is you have to serve for 7 years (I think) after graduating, and pay the money back if you fail.

Of course, since we don't really do any fighting, we end up with many less PTSDed or injured vets.